This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Obama just mentioned violent video games

#61shawnmckPosted 1/16/2013 10:53:29 AM(edited)
Sheepinator posted...
shawnmck posted...
Speaking of Obama-care....

He promised that it wouldn't cost anything....
Then he promised that it wouldn't cost more than 90 Million.
Current estimates have it at 2-Trillion, and counting.

How can anyone believe anything that comes out of his mouth ?

Remember the good old days when the Republican led wars would be fully paid for by the oil revenue from the region? Ah, those were the days.


^ Not even true.
Stop getting your info from Michael Moore.
You probably also believe that all Republicans want to kick old people off of their medicine, starve kids, destroy the environment, and that Romney ate babies too..?
#62TheBlueStigPosted 1/16/2013 10:52:00 AM
reverence27 posted...
Again this is all regulation which is necessary.

Why? Firearm homicide rates and numbers have been coming DOWN every single year for 7+ years while gun ownership went UP over 500% across the board and the population went up as well. More states than ever have concealed carry programs and more states than ever are adopting Castle Doctrine laws that make it legal for people to defend themselves with force.

The states that have made laws stricter have seen their problems go UP, while the states that have relaxed laws have seen their crime problem go DOWN.

And if we didn't have the excessive firearm problem we have today, almost no one would need to hire armed bodyguards. I don't think we need to ban firearms, but we sure as hell need more regulations on them. More training, and more education, and make them less easily accessable to those who are not mentally or physically capable of handling firearms safely,

Stop believing the media, try looking at the compiled crime reports from the FBI, right now they're the ONLY ones publishing the true numbers.


this includes the mentally unstable that live in daily fear of government takeover and could snap at any moment. Excessive fear and hate can (and does) lead to unnecessary use of firearms quicker than most other factors.

You're blind, the democrats attack freedom on a daily basis but you ignore it.

Please name one other country that has the same or less gun control (or none as many seem to want) as America that you would feel as safe living in or safer than America.


Switzerland, military grade weapons in EVERY home with the lowest firearm homicide numbers, rarely exceeding 25 per year.
---
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Ben Franklin
#63Rome218Posted 1/16/2013 10:53:25 AM
I'm going to be bluntly honest here. In 2008 Obama was someone I believed in. In 2012 I saw him as a politician and a flawed man, but a good one nonetheless.

Now I think he's an idiot! Banning assault rifles? We forget the reason we have the right to beat arms is to overthrow a tyrannical Government. Sure right now things are swell, but who knows what the world will be 100 years from now? Are we setting our future generations up for failure? This can be a major stepping stone towards taking away that right.

Then the real kicker of why I think this is stupid. Are they going to ban weapons that look the scariest? Everyone screams assault rifles needs to be banned, but more people are killed by semi auto pistols.

These assault rifles are semi auto. They have longer ranges and can go through armor better. However when it comes down to some crazy shooting up a school, it really doesn't make a difference if he has an assault rifle or several pistols.

Just because a gun looks scary, does not mean it's more dangerous.
---
HP Pavilion | Windows 7 | 700 gb HDD | 17' lcd display | Speakers | 3 USB Ports | HDMI port | Wireless-N | DVD/CD Read/Write
#64SparkItUpPosted 1/16/2013 10:53:30 AM
shawnmck posted...
thelorenzolamas posted...
shawnmck posted...
Speaking of Obama-care....

He promised that it wouldn't cost anything....
Then he promised that it wouldn't cost more than 90 Million.
Current estimates have it at 2-Trillion, and counting.

How can anyone believe anything that comes out of his mouth ?


He wants to spend OUR Tax money to help poor people? That DIRTY LYING TYRANNICAL COMMUNIST BASTARD!


^ No, what he wants is to bankrupt the system so as to re-form the United States to a more Communistic form of Government.
Read up on the "Cloward-Piven" strategy, where this exact thing was planned so as to get the Democrat Party to maintain Government control forever.



how is it that this has been the war cry of Republitards about each Democratic president since Kennedy....yet, it has never happened...Fear tactics from 50 years ago just don't hold water.
---
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqFLXayD6e8
Now don't get me wrong, yeah I think you're alright, but that won't keep me warm in the middle of the night...
#65reverence27Posted 1/16/2013 10:53:46 AM
shawnmck posted...
thelorenzolamas posted...
shawnmck posted...
Speaking of Obama-care....

He promised that it wouldn't cost anything....
Then he promised that it wouldn't cost more than 90 Million.
Current estimates have it at 2-Trillion, and counting.

How can anyone believe anything that comes out of his mouth ?


He wants to spend OUR Tax money to help poor people? That DIRTY LYING TYRANNICAL COMMUNIST BASTARD!


^ No, what he wants is to bankrupt the system so as to re-form the United States to a more Communistic form of Government.
Read up on the "Cloward-Piven" strategy, where this exact thing was planned so as to get the Democrat Party to maintain Government control forever.


If you really believe this, I would hope you avoid watching Taxi Driver.......
---
God is a vindictive bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser , a misogynistic, homophobic racist, an infanticidal, malevolent bully:Richard Dawkins
#66reverence27Posted 1/16/2013 10:57:35 AM
TheBlueStig posted...

Switzerland, military grade weapons in EVERY home with the lowest firearm homicide numbers, rarely exceeding 25 per year.


Again, this is not true.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/mythbusting-israel-and-switzerland-are-not-gun-toting-utopias/

"Ezra Klein: Israel and Switzerland are often mentioned as countries that prove that high rates of gun ownership donít necessarily lead to high rates of gun crime. In fact, I wrote that on Friday. But you say your research shows thatís not true.
Janet Rosenbaum: First of all, because they donít have high levels of gun ownership. The gun ownership in Israel and Switzerland has decreased.
For instance, in Israel, theyíre very limited in who is able to own a gun. There are only a few tens of thousands of legal guns in Israel, and the only people allowed to own them legally live in the settlements, do business in the settlements, or are in professions at risk of violence.
Both countries require you to have a reason to have a gun. There isnít this idea that you have a right to a gun. You need a reason. And then you need to go back to the permitting authority every six months or so to assure them the reason is still valid.
The second thing is that thereís this widespread misunderstanding that Israel and Switzerland promote gun ownership. They donít. Ten years ago, when Israel had the outbreak of violence, there was an expansion of gun ownership, but only to people above a certain rank in the military. There was no sense that having ordinary citizens [carry guns] would make anything safer.

Switzerland has also been moving away from having widespread guns. The laws are done canton by canton, which is like a province. Everyone in Switzerland serves in the army, and the cantons used to let you have the guns at home. Theyíve been moving to keeping the guns in depots. That means theyíre not in the household, which makes sense because the literature shows us that if the gun is in the household, the risk goes up for everyone in the household."
---
God is a vindictive bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser , a misogynistic, homophobic racist, an infanticidal, malevolent bully:Richard Dawkins
#67reverence27Posted 1/16/2013 10:57:57 AM
Of course Fox Entertainment News didn't explain this.
---
God is a vindictive bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser , a misogynistic, homophobic racist, an infanticidal, malevolent bully:Richard Dawkins
#68art_of_the_killPosted 1/16/2013 10:59:00 AM
shawnmck posted...
Currently, she is meeting stiff opposition from other Republicans from her own party....so I don't think much will come of it, but it is still very disappointing that politicians have so much power.

You should have learned that already. Remember SOPA?
---
"You've lost this argument!"
--- John Marston while lassoing/hogtying someone. Favorite quote this gen.
#69SparkItUpPosted 1/16/2013 10:59:41 AM
Rome218 posted...
I'm going to be bluntly honest here. In 2008 Obama was someone I believed in. In 2012 I saw him as a politician and a flawed man, but a good one nonetheless.

Now I think he's an idiot! Banning assault rifles? We forget the reason we have the right to beat arms is to overthrow a tyrannical Government. Sure right now things are swell, but who knows what the world will be 100 years from now? Are we setting our future generations up for failure? This can be a major stepping stone towards taking away that right.

Then the real kicker of why I think this is stupid. Are they going to ban weapons that look the scariest? Everyone screams assault rifles needs to be banned, but more people are killed by semi auto pistols.

These assault rifles are semi auto. They have longer ranges and can go through armor better. However when it comes down to some crazy shooting up a school, it really doesn't make a difference if he has an assault rifle or several pistols.

Just because a gun looks scary, does not mean it's more dangerous.


would you like a F-15 Strike Eagle with 2000 lb bombs as well? oh wait...there are limits on the 2nd amendment. The only difference between assault rifles civilians use and the rifles used in warfare are that the ones you can get at the store don't have 3round burst....that isn't much difference..The basic mechanics are the same. They are a weapon of war. very few buy them for self defense...they are basically for either those that were in the military (in a sense, I can agree with ex-soldiers having them) or for those that fantasize about being in the military and either can't or couldn't hack it.
---
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqFLXayD6e8
Now don't get me wrong, yeah I think you're alright, but that won't keep me warm in the middle of the night...
#70reverence27Posted 1/16/2013 11:00:09 AM
For the swiss' approach,
I am all for everyone being required to join the military, and only military trained personnel are granted the right to bear arms. At least then I would know majority of gun owners are disciplined.
---
God is a vindictive bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser , a misogynistic, homophobic racist, an infanticidal, malevolent bully:Richard Dawkins